-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Revolution dev kit information (IGN)
- Thread starter PhoenixDark
- Start date
- Status
PhoenixDark
Banned
:lollittlewig said:
MrSardonic
The nerdiest nerd of all the nerds in nerdland
littlewig said:
that biotch blatantly stole my idea of putting the Revmote amongst the 2001 apes. How dare he! :lol
Thanks for the insight Pkunk, others may not find it so interesting but its been puzzling me for awhile, just trying to figure out how it can and might work etc.
Basically we agree on most things, I just emphasise the pointing aspect because thats the aspect I see as barrier-breaking and an aspect I feel most people do not catch onto. Most people initially think "its a virtual wand or sword", and thats an interesting facet of possible gameplay, but the pointing is what I find to be full of possibilities.
The whole standing up thing, I was trying to give an example of how flexible this system has to be for the pointing to work. It cannot rely on "hold revmote flat and it aims at center, tilt up and cursor moves up, tilt left and it moves left, center it again and cursor moves central". This seems logical, but it would crash and burn for games. Change position and your game will spaz out, it would mean holding your revmote in the same position in 3D space which isn't practical.
I guess the sensors must be the key as I'm confused at how they can be placed anywhere around the TV.
Basically we agree on most things, I just emphasise the pointing aspect because thats the aspect I see as barrier-breaking and an aspect I feel most people do not catch onto. Most people initially think "its a virtual wand or sword", and thats an interesting facet of possible gameplay, but the pointing is what I find to be full of possibilities.
The whole standing up thing, I was trying to give an example of how flexible this system has to be for the pointing to work. It cannot rely on "hold revmote flat and it aims at center, tilt up and cursor moves up, tilt left and it moves left, center it again and cursor moves central". This seems logical, but it would crash and burn for games. Change position and your game will spaz out, it would mean holding your revmote in the same position in 3D space which isn't practical.
I guess the sensors must be the key as I'm confused at how they can be placed anywhere around the TV.
={<SMOKE>}=
Member
i'm not sure why there is so much comotion over the rev's specs. the way i see it, imagine a gamecube with twice as much ram and dedicated pixel-shader pipes and you've got a nice machine. as nice as the 360 or ps3? no. powerful enough to put out great looking games? absolutely. also, the fact that it's not doing hdtv resolutions is huge. i would imagine a large percent of the 360's and ps3's processing power will go to rendering frames at those resolutions. i'm predicting that a lot of people will be pleasantly suprised by the rev's graphics...
={<SMOKE>}= said:
3.2 ghz processors and X360 & PS3 level GPUS (X1900XT & GF 7800, these are probably weaker anyway) are having no problems spitting out over 60FPS on 2048 X 1556 resolution on PC configurations. Which, is a much bigger resolution than 1280 X 720. 720P is not a big bottleneck PS3 and X360 system setups.
This is how I think the REVmote will work:
-DPD (infra-red + sensor bar triangulation) = pointing/aiming, note: works like a laser pointer so it doesn't matter if you change seats/possitions durring gameplay and aiming is determined by triangulating the 2 points in the sensor bar and the DPD on the REVmote so that less calibration (as Jim Merrick said) is required (probably just by moving the sensor bar so that it's centered in front of/by the screen)
-gyros (1 in front, 1 in back) = 3D spacial movement, note: communicates dirrectly with the system through BT so it can be detected even when the DPD isn't pointing towards the screen which is good for games that require more movement/less aiming
-pedometer = speed/intensity of movement
-sonar/RF = determines distance to/from screen, sensor bar or system (this may or may not be needed)
-DPD (infra-red + sensor bar triangulation) = pointing/aiming, note: works like a laser pointer so it doesn't matter if you change seats/possitions durring gameplay and aiming is determined by triangulating the 2 points in the sensor bar and the DPD on the REVmote so that less calibration (as Jim Merrick said) is required (probably just by moving the sensor bar so that it's centered in front of/by the screen)
-gyros (1 in front, 1 in back) = 3D spacial movement, note: communicates dirrectly with the system through BT so it can be detected even when the DPD isn't pointing towards the screen which is good for games that require more movement/less aiming
-pedometer = speed/intensity of movement
-sonar/RF = determines distance to/from screen, sensor bar or system (this may or may not be needed)
={<SMOKE>}=
Member
Mrbob said:
well something must be going considering xbox games only have to be 720p vs 1080i and that certain games (pgr3) aren't even rendered at 720p...
and just because those pc's are doing it does not mean that rendering at those resolutions is not processor intensive.
JoshuaJSlone
Member
={<SMOKE>}=, Mrbob, I'd say you're both right. But whether 720p or above is easily attainable or a troublesome bottleneck would differ quite a bit depending on whether you're designing $300-400 hardware or $150-200 hardware.
hmmm...
for those who haven't seen 2001, iirc, there's a section in the film looking at pre-evolved, early man, and a scene where an ape discovers he can use a leg/arm bone as a weapon/tool. this signifies a huge change, because from that moment on nothing will be the same.
matt has certainly cheered up about revolution!
looking forward to gdc and e3.
for those who haven't seen 2001, iirc, there's a section in the film looking at pre-evolved, early man, and a scene where an ape discovers he can use a leg/arm bone as a weapon/tool. this signifies a huge change, because from that moment on nothing will be the same.
matt has certainly cheered up about revolution!
looking forward to gdc and e3.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3912705377429450632&q=spaceworld
Looking at that video of what GCN was supposed to be capable of I'm thinking that even though it's not even close to what I imagine a next-gen zelda to be, it really wouldn't be as bad as long as the graphics look good on their own.
I just hope rev will look considerably better than the cube. I know some 360 stuff looks like xbox games and those were built on a system that even at the early dev-kit stage was more powerful than rev, but I'm really hoping it's because the teams just sucked or maybe the hardware was hard to get accustomed to or whatever. I want to see a good noticeable leap from gamecube, please nintendo.
Looking at that video of what GCN was supposed to be capable of I'm thinking that even though it's not even close to what I imagine a next-gen zelda to be, it really wouldn't be as bad as long as the graphics look good on their own.
I just hope rev will look considerably better than the cube. I know some 360 stuff looks like xbox games and those were built on a system that even at the early dev-kit stage was more powerful than rev, but I'm really hoping it's because the teams just sucked or maybe the hardware was hard to get accustomed to or whatever. I want to see a good noticeable leap from gamecube, please nintendo.
soundwave05
Member
I'm picturing something that can run Half-Life 2 nicely at 480p with a ton of effects as sort of base level performance for Revolution.
The highest end stuff may look similar to Kameo or Perfect Dark 0 at 480p (note I said similar, not exact).
The highest end stuff may look similar to Kameo or Perfect Dark 0 at 480p (note I said similar, not exact).
NeonZ
Member
Chrono said:
You actually still like the Spaceworld video? Meh. It looked good at the time, but it's not even the best shown by the GC anymore. 2 characters with fairly detailed models, but poor textures and in an almost completely empty room? That's not very impressive.
The model does look slightly better than Twilight Princess', especially because they didn't try to add too many details, but it's not that good.
Didn't SSBM actually use that Ganondorf model? I remember something like that from a translation of the official site.
soundwave05
Member
The top Link seems to have a higher poly count (not to mention what seems to be geometrey on the walls) ... but the artstyle for the Twilight Princess Link is much better.
Rev should be able to do the top pic easily though.
Rev should be able to do the top pic easily though.
Mallrat83 said:
Yes. And in every single case of a game that wasn't embarrasing shovelware from Japanese devs wanting a quick cash-in, it fucking rapes Zelda:TP. Not even a competition. People don't realize just how far it goes in HD, with endlessly superior textures (the awful ones in TP are laughable), and far more complex worlds (in terms of landscape/character detail). The closest viable competition is Kameo. And although I think its art (LOL) is hideous, technically it proceeds to take Zelda:TP, cut its head off and piss inside its open neck. And this is a game that wasn't even built from ground-up with 360 in mind.
Later games we've seen for 360 simply make such a comment so idiotic that you can't help but feel sad for those who believe it. They're truly wearing their sad ignorant hearts on their sleeves.
PhoenixDark said:
Precisely. Iwata saying this, pretty much devalues any comment he has to make on graphics. Not only that, Nintendo's new philosophy pretty much requires that they downplay how important it is and state that they're making things that compete with truly next-gen visual technology. So that again lessens any viability Iwata's ridiculous comments on this subject could have.
kia said:
Can't wait to see this at E3!
Cosmozone said:
Bitterness? You better have a fucking good explanation for this stupidity.
AniHawk said:
It's funny, even the worst next-gen games have their benefits over Zelda:TP. But I guess if Iwata only takes into consideration silly Japanese shovelware cash-ins, he wouldn't be too far off. Of course, that makes his comments disingenuous... but that's another story!
SnakeXs said:
Well folks, I finally said "wow." We keep going deeper and deeper into the unbelievable valley of points that have absolutely no relevance whatsoever in the discussion of real-time videogame products in HD!
jedimike is correct. Even if Revolution could do 360/PS3 visuals in SD resolution, it's automatically inferior because it can't match it in HD. It doesn't matter if it only effects three people on earth, because it's a fact.
Amir0x said:
Jedimike himself said even if Revolution is "10x more powerful than PS3 and 360 combined".
Guessing how strong that is would be silly, but as huge as HD is, it wouldn't make up for that. SD doesn't magically turn to garbage once you have an HDTV or see HD or game in HD, and a machine that strong would surely be more visually appealing.
You're 100% right in your second point, but don't go misquoting me. Jedimike stated the 10x more powerful, and I'd easily say a fictional machine of that power could produce FMV visuals in real time, which validates my point. Thanks though.
SnakeXs said:
It doesn't validate your point in terms of the silliness of comparing DVD movies with producing visuals of this calibur in real-time in SD. Not even 10x would truly have you producing Spirited Within or Pixar movies in real-time. That's why i hate using that sort of thing, because '10x' specs does not mean '10x the visual quality produced.'
Any event, semantics is gonna get us nowhere.
Amir0x said:
I agree 100% on both points. HD is the future, Nintendo doesn't "get" it, and it would have been a major plus even if it wasn't their aim. But, that's not what they're after, and I'm still just as interested as before.
But, again, the point I was trying to make wasn't that Revolution WILL be competitive with next gen consoles on SDTVs. Not at all. Simply that SD doesn't automatically make something inferior. Like I said before, SD at "it's best", as fictional as that may be for real time gaming visuals, can compete and traunce next gen consoles in all their HD splendor.
Oh fucks sake, Rev will not be capable of graphics as good as PS3 or x360. they can have better textures, better environments, more happening, etc etc. Then you have HD.
Which means fuck all because at the end of the day its really all about art direction now. Look at Shadow of the Collosus, stunning. Emotive. Breathtaking. This is the stage where processing power will not take you.
You will have games on the Rev which will be like SoTC, RE4 and Zelda - you will say wow, you will be immersed, you will feel emotional. You will have games on PS3 which are turds, bland, plasticy, disjointed. End of the day the power of consoles now is so great, its all about art and developer skill. There WILL be overlap here.
The significant problem is smaller companies will not be able to fulfil the potential of PS3/x360 without taking a big financial hit, so all the HD glory there could be a disadvantage forcing devs to work to that standard and invariably the game will suffer. How will 2D or cel shaded games look in HD by the way? Curious...
Nintendo's approach with the Rev is to keep things cheap for gamers AND developers.
Which I am all for. I can get my HD buzz from my other machines.
Which means fuck all because at the end of the day its really all about art direction now. Look at Shadow of the Collosus, stunning. Emotive. Breathtaking. This is the stage where processing power will not take you.
You will have games on the Rev which will be like SoTC, RE4 and Zelda - you will say wow, you will be immersed, you will feel emotional. You will have games on PS3 which are turds, bland, plasticy, disjointed. End of the day the power of consoles now is so great, its all about art and developer skill. There WILL be overlap here.
The significant problem is smaller companies will not be able to fulfil the potential of PS3/x360 without taking a big financial hit, so all the HD glory there could be a disadvantage forcing devs to work to that standard and invariably the game will suffer. How will 2D or cel shaded games look in HD by the way? Curious...
Nintendo's approach with the Rev is to keep things cheap for gamers AND developers.
Which I am all for. I can get my HD buzz from my other machines.
kaizoku said:
Held back by a terrible framerate, directly related to technology. This prevented an otherwise beautiful game from the heights it might have otherwise reached.
People also forget that technology doesn't always just increase what you see on the screen. It can lead to dramatically superior physics engine, more complex AI, any number of things which Revo will have a disadvantage in IF it's significantly less powerful than PS3/360.
Amir0x said:
Yes of course, but we all know Rev will be able to produce a game of SotC quality and best it on all technical levels, so really nothing anyone should be worried about.
Despite its technical flaws, its still emotive, still a great game. Despite Kameo's superb graphics, its shallow and empty. I think this just goes to show just how irrelevant the difference between PS3 and Rev will be. It will have enough power to satisfy us.
A little fun with numbers...
Chihiro (733 MHz P3 based CPU, little customization) to LindBergh (3 GHz P4 based CPU, little customization)
GameCube (485 MHz PPC based CPU, highly customized) to Revolution (2-3x 485 MHz PPC based CPU, highly customized)
Chihiro (200 MHz nVidia GF3 based GPU) to LindBergh (nVidia GF7 based GPU)
GameCube (162 MHz custom ATi GPU) to Revolution (2-3x 162 MHz custom ATi GPU)
Chihiro (64MB to 512MB total RAM) to LindBergh (1024MB RAM)
GameCube (43MB RAM) to Revolution (88 to 110MB RAM)
...anyone think it's possible we'll see a Chihiro to LindBergh style jump? Will the the visual difference between Mario Sunshine and Mario Revolution be similar to that of HOTD3 to HOTD4?
Chihiro (733 MHz P3 based CPU, little customization) to LindBergh (3 GHz P4 based CPU, little customization)
GameCube (485 MHz PPC based CPU, highly customized) to Revolution (2-3x 485 MHz PPC based CPU, highly customized)
Chihiro (200 MHz nVidia GF3 based GPU) to LindBergh (nVidia GF7 based GPU)
GameCube (162 MHz custom ATi GPU) to Revolution (2-3x 162 MHz custom ATi GPU)
Chihiro (64MB to 512MB total RAM) to LindBergh (1024MB RAM)
GameCube (43MB RAM) to Revolution (88 to 110MB RAM)
...anyone think it's possible we'll see a Chihiro to LindBergh style jump? Will the the visual difference between Mario Sunshine and Mario Revolution be similar to that of HOTD3 to HOTD4?
kaizoku said:
I think the problem is, this DOESN'T satisfy me. It might satisfy you, but when I play a next-gen game... if it looked like SotC, even with a solid framerate, I'd be fucking disappointed. There's so many places the game could have gone that it couldn't, because of technology. Imagine beasts where you can go INSIDE them. Imagine Colossus that chased you throughout the entire landscape, destroying mountains in its wake.
When I play it on PS2 I think "wow, they really pushed the system. It's obvious they're doing some great things given the shitty technology." I don't think "If next-gen games could look like this, I'd be satisified!" I'd think the exact opposite if that was the standard.
Amir0x said:
Terrible framerates? I'm sure I've heard of 30fps and slowdown on Xbox360 games.
If they had aimed the full power of the machine at SD resolutions then I believe it's fairly safe to say those Xbox 360 games would have been running at a constant smooth 60fps.
So it could be argued that due to HD being as standard, this prevented otherwise beautiful games from the heights they might have otherwise reached for the vast majority of gamers who only have SDTV's.
As far as physics go, the Revolution controller will do far more to enhance the physics of a game than any boost in hardware power.
PkunkFury said:
I certainly don't know much about tracking technologies, but would rf be too fast to track distance with timing? Assuming the sensor nodes and the rev have something like an RFID in them that can do some limited processing and reply with a unique id that would not only be unique for the node, but also unique for the controller that's pinging the node. It would allow tracking for multiple objects and the RF would make sure that during the frenzy of a game, input wouldn't be lost due to visiblity.
As far as positioning goes, the console itself would know the dimensions of the sensor bar, the distance between it and the two nodes (as well as which is which if a RFIDish tech is used). That's enough to for a triangle without any relative position which can serve as a basis for later calculations.
The controller is able to tell the console the distance it is from each of the three nodes which is enough to form a three sided pyramid (it's important that it know which distance is from each node). That's enough to get a relative position of the controller from the console.
The last thing that needed is the position of the TV relative to the console and the controller. I think an important detail that all TV's are rectangular. The rectagularness can be used to figure out the angle that the TV's being viewed from if the controller can take even a low res image. Assuming that the controller can also find a pinpointed distance on the surface of the TV, it can then figure out the location and size of the screen in the same 3d space. Add the direction from the gyroscopic sensor and all this info is related back to the position of the console.
With this type of setup, there are a couple of advantages. A line of sight doesn't need to be maintained for a controller all the time, just for the initial orientation and any subsequent reorientation. The other nice thing is that any controller can do the reorientation for all the others since all the console really needs is it and the sensors location relative to the TV screen.
There are a few things that I think we can assume about the technology since this is Nintendo that's using it.
It will be leveraging previous technology that they're comfortable with.
Setup will be minimal to nonexistantant and will be very hard if not impossible to screw up. This is even more so the case now since they're targeting non-gamers and technologial phlebians.
The controls can't screw up gameplay. The tech should behave consistantly and reliably. Consider their choice of cartrigies over CD's, 1T-sram, how they build their toys so they can outlive cockroaches in a nuclear holocost, and the removal of some tracks in Mario Kart DS Wifi which have been proved to somewhat "work". There are some anomolies like the choice of Rambus RDRam for the 64, but for the most part, when they design something, they expect it to work excactly how it was designed.
Nintendo doesn't like to sell expensive hardware much less take a loss on it.
While there are a great deal of ways for Nintendo to make their magic work, the restriction on cost without a sacrifice on idiot proofing is want really limits the solution. I really do hope that whatever Nintendo is doing, it'll simply just work.
Amir0x said:
Lets not take it to extremes and say "rev will look like this without slowdown".
Its clearly going to be next gen vs PS2's last gen. Sure the boundaries of PS3 will reach higher, but Rev will probably reach pretty high too. Its not like average games on PS3 will completely eclipse even the best games on Rev.
When the systems come out no one cares about power anyway, its all about exclusives, which game can we play next, omg look at what they did with this game etc. Who really makes a big deal about the Xbox being more powerful than the PS2?
We're not looking at a half-assed next gen console from Nintendo here, they know there is a minimum requirement to even sit at the table. We'll see a significant leap from the Gamecube on a par with the leap from N64-GC.
jarrod said:
Not for me, but I'm sure that'd be good enough for other people. I have an HDTV, so it'd look pretty lame compared to the games IN HD resolution.
Taker666 said:
This is a terrible argument.
1.) What is done in early 360 launch games, is irrelevant to what the system could be able to do in its life.
2.) What developers 'aim' for is again different from what the technology could actually do. If you don't think PGR3 couldn't be done on 360 with 60fps given more dev time, I don't think you're being honest with yourself.
3.) Games not in HD are not living up to their potential, period. HD is superior for a fact, and anything in SD resolution - even if it's 'comparable visually' - still cannot contend with the same graphics, except in HD. (SnakeXs - Pixar graphics are better than 360 graphics in HD though, I understand!) If your argument is that Revolution has it "right", 'cause it'll be doing it in SD graphics WHICH PERHAPS MEANS BETTER FRAMERATES (lol), I just can't take the point seriously.
4.) And...finally...your most fucking nuts point: "Revolution controller will do more to enhance phusics of a game than a boost in hardware power"? Do you even know what PHYSICS are? What the fuck does potentially superior controls in certain genres have to do with the type of physics engine a game is pumping out? Clearly, you have NOT thought this one through.
kaizoku said:
I didn't say this, I was just using your hypothetical 'standard' that you said I'd might be satisified with. I'm saying... if that's what it was, I wouldn't be satisifed. Even if it was an incremental improvement over that, I'd still probably not be satisified.
kaizoku said:
No, I care about power. I often buy multi-console games on Xbox because of this. If Revolution actually beat out PS3 or 360 in exclusives - something that SEEMS highly suspect to me given waht we already know - then at the end, you're right, I'd deal with it 'cause that's where the games are. But I'd still care.
Floyd
Member
Amir0x said:
Well I have realized it for years being a PC and console gamer. The difference is clear to anyone, you get a far crispier sharper image, but i think your going well over the top.
I'm assuming your overstating it because nbots are trying to understate it and its annoying you.
Bah, all this Zelda vs Xbox360 crap is really taking away all the charm Zelda: TP has.
Stop killing Zelda Xbots!
Besides, why are we even going on about graphics, are Nbots really that concern about them and are Xbots really that threatened about the Rev's capabilities?
I'd say the answer is no to both of them.
PS - Why do the Rev graphics debates always turn into a MS vs Nintendo war? Sony gets off so easily.
Stop killing Zelda Xbots!
Besides, why are we even going on about graphics, are Nbots really that concern about them and are Xbots really that threatened about the Rev's capabilities?
I'd say the answer is no to both of them.
PS - Why do the Rev graphics debates always turn into a MS vs Nintendo war? Sony gets off so easily.
littlewig said:Bah, all this Zelda vs Xbox360 crap is really taking away all the charm Zelda: TP has.
Stop killing Zelda Xbots!
Besides, why are we even going on about graphics, are Nbots really that concern about them and are Xbots really that threatened about the Rev's capabilities?
I'd say the answer is no to both of them.
PS - Why do the Rev graphics debates always turn into a MS vs Nintendo war? Sony gets off so easily.
For the record, I'm not an Xbot! Zelda:TP is my most anticipated game of the year, behind Mother 3!
Amir0x said:
I didn't say the physics engine, I said the physics of the game.
I presume the point of having all that extra power being used to improve game physics is to make it a more "real world" experience. How things move, how things bounce, how things explode, how things fall and how you as a gamer can interact with those things etc.. etc.
You can create the most realistic physics engine in the world but it means little if the only interaction and way to effect that world is a dpad and a fire button.
Enhancing the physics of a game can have as much to do with how you interact with that world as it does creating that world and its laws.
You can have a standard controller and press a button to throw a ball, the ball bounces realistically into a puddle and creates a very realistic splash, drips of water flying off the ball realistically and realistically landing on the wall where they realistically run down while the ball comes to a stop with the few remaining drops of water dripping off/rolling down into a small puddle where it stands (in a very realistic manner). Very nice I'm sure......
or
You can have a different controller, but this one is able to control the speed of the throw (through many variations), the angle of the throw (in a full 3d plane), how much force was behind the throw when you let the ball go (which would be translated into high how it bounced as well as how far) and if you put spin on the ball when you let it go, in a manner more closely related to how you would throw a ball in the real world. The only thing is, you just get a simple splash when it hits the water and nothing else.
To me the second option enhances the "physics of the game" far more than the first.
AndoCalrissian
Member
It's pretty tough to tell sometimes.Amir0x said:
I think everyone needs to come to grips with the fact that the system won't be as powerful as next-gen consoles, even without HD, and that while Zelda: TP looks amazing, it's graphics are clearly trumped by next-gen technology. Let's all realize those things and just move on.
GitarooMan
Member
AndoCalrissian said:
Amen.
- Status